2003 Urban Water Conservation
Proposal
San Francisco Public Utilities
Commission
Commercial ULFT Rebate Program
in San Francisco
December 3, 2002
Application Part A — Project
Description, Organizational, Financial
and Legal Information
A-1 Urban Water Conservation Grant Application Cover Sheet
1. Applicant (Organization or affiliation): San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
2. Project Title:
Rebates for Commercial Ultra Low Flush
Toilets
3. Person authorized to sign and submit proposal:
Name, Title
Michael Carlin
Mailing address 1145 Market St, Suite 401
Telephone
415 934 5787
Fax
415 934 5750
E-mail
mcarlin@puc.sf.ca.us
4. Contact person (if different):
Name, Title
Mailing address
Telephone
Fax
E-mail
Suzanne Arena
1145 Market St, Suite 401
415 934 5701
415 934 5750
sarena@puc.sf.ca.us
5. Funds requested (dollar amount):
$75,000
6. Applicant funds pledged (local cost share) (dollar amount):
7. Total project costs (dollar amount):
$113,548
$38,548
8. Estimated net water savings (acre-feet/year):
Estimated total amount of water to be saved (acre-feet):
Over years
45
675
15 years
Benefit/cost ratio of project for applicant:
Estimated $/acre-feet of water to be saved:
___$1.33/$1.00______
$2,750______
9. Project life (month/year to month/year):
10/03-10/05
10. State Assembly District where the project is to be conducted:
12 & 13
11. State Senate District where the project is to be conducted:
3&8
12. Congressional District(s) where the project is to be conducted: 8
13. County where the project is to be conducted:
San Francisco
14. Do the actions in this application involve physical changes in land use, or
potential future changes in land use?
(a) Yes
(if yes, complete the land use check list at
http://www.calfed.water.ca.gov/adobe_pdf/Questionnaires_EC_Permits_LandUse.
pdf and submit it with the proposal
(b) No
No
A-2 Application Signature Page
By signing below, the official declares the following:
The truthfulness of all representations in the application;
The individual signing the form is authorized to submit the application on behalf of the
applicant;
The individual signing the form read and understood the conflict of interest and
confidentiality section and waives any and all rights to privacy and confidentiality of
the application on behalf of the applicant; and
The applicant will comply with all terms and conditions identified in this Application
Package if selected for funding.
_________________
Signature
________________________
Name and title
________
Date
A-3 Application Checklist
Complete this checklist to confirm all sections of this application package have been
completed.
Part A: Project Description, Organizational, Financial and Legal Information
_______A-1 Urban Water Conservation Grant Application Cover Sheet
_______A-2 Application Signature Page
_______A-3 Application Checklist
_______A-4 Description of project
_______A-5 Maps
_______A-6 Statement of work, schedule
_______A-7 Agency authority
_______A-8 Operation and maintenance (O&M)
_______A-9 Innovation
Part B: Engineering and Hydrologic Feasibility (construction projects only)
_______B-1 Certification statement
_______B-2 Project reports and previous studies
_______B-3 Preliminary project plans and specifications
_______B-4 Construction inspection plan
Part C: Plan for Environmental Documentation and Permitting
_______C-1 CEQA/NEPA
_______C-2 Permits, easements, licenses, acquisitions, and certifications
_______C-3 Local land use plans
_______C-4 State and local statutes and regulations
Part D: Need for Project and Community Involvement
_______D-1 Need for project
_______D-2 Community involvement, support, opposition
Part E: Water Use Efficiency Improvements and Other Benefits
_______E-1 Water use efficiency improvements
_______E-2 Other project benefits
Part F: Economic Justification, Benefits to Costs Analysis
_______F-1 Net water savings
_______F-2 Project budget and budget justification
_______F-3 Economic efficiency
_______Benefit/Cost Analysis Tables 1; 2; 3; 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d; and 5
A-4
Description of project
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission is requesting $75,000 to create a
toilet rebate program for food establishments. Currently, SFPUC has an existing
toilet rebate program for residential accounts. This new program will be specifically
geared toward the replacement of low efficient toilets at restaurants, bars and
coffeehouses in San Francisco. Due to the high number of tourists visiting San
Francisco, 30-45% of a restaurant’s customer base use the restaurant’s restrooms.
The SFPUC and the restaurants would realize a substantial savings in water supply
(for the City) and water costs (for the business) with the replacement of water
inefficient toilets with 1.6 gallon per flush toilets in restaurants, bars and
coffeehouses.
A total of 1,000 rebates of $75 per toilet over a two-year period would be made
available to San Francisco restaurants. Due to budget constraints, the San Francisco
Public Utilities Commission has limited its rebate program to single-family and
multifamily accounts.
This new program would compliment San Francisco’s existing residential Ultra Low
flush toilet rebate program. Since January 1995, SFPUC has replaced 23,000 toilets
throughout its toilet rebate program. Over the last six years, San Francisco has also
conducted 37 sales where we have sold 36,000 ultra low flush toilets to San
Francisco residents for only $10. With a total of 59,000 toilets replaced at a savings
of 20 ccf per toilet per year, the annual savings would be 1,156,652 ccf. The
calculation using the estimate that the restaurants will be open for business 312 days
per year.
Building upon the success of the residential toilet program, the SFPUC would like to
expand into the commercial sector for potential water savings. The primary objective
of the program is to save water in a cost- effective manner that is responsive to
customer needs. The SFPUC believes that the commercial sector in San Francisco
would provide a new arena of water savings to an industry that we have not
previously sought out. The SFPUC believes that with financial incentives, the industry
will be highly receptive to the retrofit program. The project is straightforward and will
yield verifiable and quantifiable water savings. The benefit to cost ratio is $5.96/1
($447 for water savings for 20 ccf for 15 years under the City’s current water
consumption charges to $75 for the rebate).
The goal of the Proposition 13 Water Conservation Program is to accelerate the
implementation of cost effective actions to help meet the growing demand for clean
and abundant water supplies throughout the state. The SFPUC believes that a
commercial ULFT rebate program especially targeted to restaurants will yield
significant savings in an area yet to be reached in San Francisco. The SFPUC
believes that this grant will allow for the establishment of a new and exciting water
conservation program and allow us to gauge the interest of the commercial and
eventually industrial communities in San Francisco.
A-6 Statement of work, schedule
The SFPUC’s Water Conservation Unit will administer the program. The Water
Conservation Unit has a proven track record of administering water conservation
rebate programs in the San Francisco region. The Unit will be responsible for the
following tasks:
1. Design, marketing and promotion of the commercial ULFT rebate program to
restaurants, bars and coffeehouses in San Francisco
2. Act as a liaison between the targeted facilities and the SFPUC
3. Design and print rebate forms
4. Process rebates
5. Develop and maintain a database of customer’s receiving rebates
6. Oversee and verify retrofit acting also as a liaison as needed
7. Administer a customer satisfaction survey
8. Submit requisite programmatic and fiscal reports of program activities and
successes
See Attachment A for schedule of tasks
A-7 Monitoring and evaluation
The SFPUC Water Conservation Unit will conduct monitoring and assessment of the
new Commercial ULFT program. The Unit will maintain a database indicating
customer rebate amounts paid, rebates received and balance due (year to date). On
a quarterly basis, the Unit will also provide the Commission (the overseeing
governing body of the SFPUC) a spreadsheet listing the name, address and account
number of the rebate applicant, customer satisfaction information and post-project
water savings information after the equipment is retrofitted. Customer satisfaction
surveys will be administered to gauge the success of the program and to solicit
comments and suggestions. Quarterly reports will be issued to the Department of
Water Resources (DWR) as required.
Expected outcomes:
Quantification of water savings will be based on information from the California Urban
Water Conservation Council’s CII ULFT Savings Study, 2001. The SFPUC expects to
see an average of 47 gallons per day, per toilet that is retrofitted. Quarterly
spreadsheets will document the actual water savings.
Performance measures:
1. Complete development and printing of rebate materials by end of 1st Quarter
2. Begin marketing and liaison activities by beginning of 2nd Quarter
3. Review customer satisfaction surveys and take corrective measures as necessary
end of 4th Quarter
4. Document water savings end of 4th Quarter
A-8 Qualifications of Applicant
Ms. Kim Knox, Water Conservation Coordinator for the SFPUC, will be the project
manager. See resume Attachment B
A-9 Innovation
The SFPUC has built a highly successful ULFT rebate program that has been aimed
at our residential customers. Over the past six years the SFPUC has sold 33,000
ultra low flush toilets for $10 resulting in a water savings of 800 CF per toilet per year.
Since the average life of a toilet is 15 years the resulting water savings from these
toilets sales is 396,000,000 CF of water. Due to budget constraints, the San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission has limited its rebate program to single-family
and multifamily accounts.
SFPUC believes that significant water savings can be achieved in the restaurant
sector and would like to use the grant to test the level of interest in the industry. We
will build on the success that this grant allows and expand the program to be the
most responsive to our customers.
A-10 Agency Authority
1. SFPUC has the legal authority to submit this application and enter into a funding
contract. A resolution of support for this application will be forthcoming.
2. SFPUC is the department of the City and County of San Francisco (a Charter
City), which is responsible for delivering water to the City and County of San
Francisco and for operating the regional water system known as Hetch Hetchy.
3. No election is required before entering into a funding contract with the State.
4. The funding agreement will be subject to the review of the City and County of San
Francisco City Attorney’s office. The City Attorney has already reviewed this
application any does not foresee and potential conflicts.
5. There is no pending litigation that would impact the SFPUC’s ability to complete
this proposed project.
A-11 Operations and Maintenance
Not required for this proposed project.
Part B
Not required for this proposed project.
Part C
This proposed project would not be subject to CEQA or NEPA.
Part D
D-1
The efficient use of California’s limited water supplies is a critical local, regional, and
statewide issue. In an effort to address this issue, the SFPUC has made, and will
continue to make investments in water use efficiency programs that will:
•
•
•
Delay the need to examine other sources of future water supplies
Achieve objectives detailed in the SFPUC’s 2000 Urban Water Management
Plan
Comply with its obligations as a signatory to the California Urban Water
Conservation Council’s Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Urban Water
Conservation in California (MOU)
The purpose of this Program is to significantly increase water use efficiency by
offering restaurants, bars and coffeehouses financial incentives to retrofit water
inefficient toilets with ULFTs. Implementation of this program fulfills Best
Management Practice Number 9 , Conservation Programs for Commercial, Industrial
and Institutional Accounts, as defined in the MOU. ULFTs save 47 gallons or more
per day. Providing financial incentives to restaurants, bars and coffeehouses to
encourage these businesses to retrofit their toilets will yield significant savings in
water to the City and significant savings to the customer in their water bills. This
program is a win-win partnership.
Currently, the SFPUC offers water conservation audits as well as other conservation
services to businesses. This new program will expand the services and incentives
that the SFPUC offers the industry, and allow a closer working relationship with
businesses to discuss and develop other potential water savings opportunities.
Awarding of this grant will allow the SFPUC to enter into a new arena of commercial
water conservation and achieve significant water savings for the City and its
customers.
This proposal has the potential to positively impact the Bay-Delta systems. Through
the installation of commercial ULFTs, water quality in the San Francisco Bay may be
improved by reducing the amount of wastewater flows. In addition, conservation
efforts will slow the need to examine sources of future water supplies other than
Hetch Hetchy. The SFPUC’s conservation efforts are important as part of a longterm, comprehensive effort to reduce pressure on the Bay-Delta system to meet
regional and statewide water needs. One of the fundamental objectives of the
CALFED Bay-Delta Program is to reduce the disparity between Bay-Delta water
supplies, and current and projected beneficial uses dependent on the Bay-Delta
system. Water use efficiency projects are one of the cornerstone strategies that
CALFED is implementing to achieve this objective. Incentives for the purchase and
installation of commercial ULFTs will reduce the demand for a significant urban use
of Bay-Delta water supplies.
This is a locally cost-effective program relative to savings in production and operating
costs as shown in Part F. This Project is compatible with goals included in the
SFPUC’s 2000 Urban Water Management Plan and its ongoing efforts to achieve
greater water use efficiency through programs for reducing long-term commercial
water demands.
D-2 Outreach, Community Involvement, Support, Opposition
D-2 Outreach, Community Involvement, Support and Opposition
Public outreach efforts will be include working with Local 38-Plumbers and
Steamfitters Union, plumbing contractors, plumbing supply stores, hardware stores
and the City’s two restaurant associations. Since the SFPUC’s billing system
identifies all commercial accounts by their Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
code, two targeted mailing will be sent to all restaurant that have individual meters
with the SFPUC. (A small number of restaurants and coffeehouses are housed in
hotels or office buildings and do not have a separate water meter.)
Outreach Efforts
An effective public outreach effort is essential to the project’s success. Customer
contact will be made through various means including the Chamber of Commerce,
the Golden Gate Restaurant Association, the Board of Supervisor’s public hearings
and disadvantaged community members, to promote and reinforce water use
efficiency by providing financial incentives to purchase commercial ULFTs. The
partnership that has already been developed between the SFPUC and local
environmental and community groups through the SFPUC’s successful residential
ULFT Rebate Program will ensure that a large and economically diverse customer
base will be reached.
Part E – Water Use Efficiency Improvements and other Benefits
E-1
The benefits of the Program are consistent with water conservation goals included in
the SFPUC’s Urban Water Management Plan. The Program is consistent with
CALFED’s objectives as expressed in its Framework for Action (June 9, 2000) and
the Record of Decision that followed. The Program will increase the amount of water
saved through conservation by assuring that the SFPUC’s commercial are offered
financial incentives to retrofit their water inefficient toilets with ULFTs.
Through the installation of 1000 ULFTs, a total of 19,604 ccf or 45 acre-feet of water
per year will be saved and 677 acre-feet of water will be saved over the estimated
15-year life of the machines. This calculation is using the estimate that the average
restaurant would be open for business 312 days per year. This Program will support
DWR’s and CALFED’s water conservation objectives in the following manner:
•
Delay the need to examine other sources of future water supplies.
•
Through the installation ULFTs in San Francisco’s restaurants, water quality in the
San Francisco Bay may be improved by reducing the amount of wastewater
flows.
•
Enhance the aquatic habitats and ecological functions in the Bay-Delta by water
conservation efforts in San Francisco.
•
Reduce the disparity between Bay-Delta water supplies, and current and
projected beneficial uses dependent on the Bay-Delta system.
•
Water Savings and their value are based on the table below:
Benefit/Unit
# of Units
Acre-Feet/ULFT
ULFT
.677
Total Benefit
Acre-Feet
1000
Alt. Supply (1)
677
$ 1,861,750
Present Value
Of Total Benefit
Alt. Supply (2)
$ 438,1
1. Based on alternative supply development cost of $2,750 acre-foot for 8 years, as
documented in the “Water Supply Master Plan” prepared by the San Francisco Public
Utilities Commission and the Bay Area Water User’s Association in February 2000.
2. Based on a discount rate of 6% and a 10-year savings, beginning in year one.
E-2 Other Project Benefits
There are many project benefits that cannot be effectively quantified at this point in
time. These are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
The new program (the liaison component in particular) will give us access to
commercial businesses that we have not previously contacted. We will use the
opportunity to offer water audits and educate businesses about other water
conservation methods.
Improved local watershed ecosystem by decreasing diversions from local creeks
and reservoirs thereby benefiting in-stream uses.
Sustained economic health of Bay Area business communities in San Francisco.
Water supply reliability is a key element in the continued growth and vitality in
California. Water conservation is a primary component of the SFPUC’s 2000
Urban Water Management Plan.
Water conservation through the retrofit of water inefficient toilets with commercial
ULFTs at restaurants, bars and coffeehouses is an innovative new conservation
arena for the SFPUC.
Customer awareness and attitudes towards water conservation are heightened.
Relief for the SFPUC agency infrastructure. The SFPUC can avoid upsizing
infrastructure to meet future peak demands through conservation. Water use
efficiency decreases the amount of wastewater produced.
Part F – Economic Justification: Benefits to Costs
F-1 Net Water Savings
Through the installation of 1000 ULFTs, a total of 45 acre-feet of water per year will
be saved and 677 over the estimated 15-year life of the toilets. SFPUC has
requested funds in their budget for FY 03-04 for a study on quantifying the savings
resulting from these rebate program.
F-2 Project Budget and Budget Justification
Table 1: Capital Costs
Capital Cost Category
(a)
(a Land Purchase/Easement
)
(b Planning/Design/Engineering
)
(c Materials/Installation
)
(d Structures
)
(e Equipment Purchases/Rentals
)
(f) Environmental
Mitigation/Enhancement
(g Construction/Administration/Ove
) rhead
(h Project Legal/License Fees
)
(i) Other
(j) Total (1) (a + ... + i)
(k Capital Recovery Factor: use
) Table 6
(l) Annual Capital Costs (j x k)
Cos
t
(b)
Contingency
Percent
(c)
$0
Contingency Subtotal
(e)
$
(d)
(bxc)
(b+d)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
(1) Costs must match Project Budget prepared in Section F-2.
Table 2: Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs
Administration
(a)
$9,348
Operations
(b)
$19,100
Maintenance
(c)
Other
(d)
$10,100
Total
(e)
38,548
Table 3: Total Annual Costs
Annual Capital Costs (1)
(a)
Annual O&M Costs (2)
(b)
Total Annual Costs
(c)
(a+b)
$38,548
$38,548
(1) From Table 1 line (l)
(2) From Table 2 Total, column (e)
Budget Justification:
Direct labor – [NOTE: These costs are borne by the applicant]. Day to day
administration of the rebate program, including marketing and printing, application
processing, record keeping, liaison function, and installation verification inspections.
Other Direct Costs – ULFT rebates provide up to $75 towards the purchase and
installation of the ULFT. This proposal would use the entire requested grant amount
of $75,000 to cover the cost of the ULFT rebates ($75,000/$75 per rebate=1000
rebates).
Table 4: Water Supply Benefits
Net water savings (acre-feet/year) ______45_______
4a. Avoided Costs of Current Supply Sources
Sources of Supply
Cost of Water ($/AF)
Annual Displaced Supply
(AF)
Annual Avoided
Costs ($)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(a)
(b x c)
Hetch Hetchy
$625
45
$28,145
Total
4b. Alternative Costs of Future Supply Sources
Future Supply Sources
Total Capital
Capital Recovery
Costs ($)
Factor (1)
(a)
(b)
(c)
Annual Capital
Costs ($)
(d)
Annual O&M
Costs ($)
(e)
(b x c)
Hetch Hetchy Upgraded
$0
Total
(1) 6% discount rate; Use Table 6- Capital Recovery Factor
Total Annual
Avoided Costs ($)
(f)
(d + e)
$2,750
$123,750
4c. Water Supplier Revenue (Vendibility)
Parties Purchasing
Project Supplies
(a)
Amount of
Water to be
Sold
Selling
Price
($/AF)
Expected
Frequency
of Sales (%)
(b)
(c)
SFPUC
45 AF
$625
"Option"
Fee ($/AF)
(1)
Expected
Selling
Price
($/AF)
(d)
(e)
(f)
100%
(c x d)
$625.00
(2)
$0
Total
Selling
Price
($/AF)
(g)
(e + f)
$625.00
Annual
Expected
Water
Sale
Revenue
($)
(h)
(b x g)
Total
(1) During the analysis period, what percentage of years are water sales expected to occur? For example, if water will only
be sold half of the years, enter 50% (0.5).
(2) "Option" fees are paid by a contracting agency to a selling agency to maintain the right of the contracting agency to buy
water whenever needed. Although the water may not be purchased every year, the fee is usually paid every year.
4d: Total Water Supply Benefits
(a) Annual Avoided Cost of Current Supply Sources ($) from 4a,
column (d)
(b) Annual Avoided Cost of Alternative Future Supply Sources ($) from
4b, column (f)
(c) Annual Expected Water Sale Revenue ($) from 4c, column (h)
(d) Total Net Annual Water Supply Benefits ($)
(a + b + c)
$28,145
$123,750
$151,895
Table 5: Benefit/Cost Ratio
Project Benefits ($) (1)
$151,895
Project Costs ($) (2)
$$38,548
Benefit/Cost Ratio
$113,347
(1) From Tables 4d, row (d): Total Annual Water Supply Benefits
(2) From Table 3, column (c) : Total Annual Costs
Table 6: Capital Recovery Factor
(Use to obtain factor for Table 1, Line k or Table 4b, Column (c)
Life of Project (in
years)
Capital Recovery Factor
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
0.1791
0.1610
0.1470
0.1359
0.1268
0.1193
0.1130
0.1076
0.1030
0.0990
0.0954
0.0924
0.0896
0.0872
0.0850
0.0830
0.0813
0.0797
0.0782
0.0769
0.0757
0.0746
0.0736
0.0726
0.0718
0.0710
0.0703
0.0696
0.0690
0.0684
0.0679
0.0674
0.0669
0.0665
0.0661
0.0657
0.0653
0.0650
0.0647
0.0644
0.0641
0.0639
0.0637
0.0634
Attachment A
ULTF Rebate Program for Restaurants (Bars and Coffeehouses) in San Francisco
Schedule
Tasks
Design, market and promote materials for rebate
program
Provide Liaison to qualified facilities
1st
Quarter
X
$
X
2nd
Quarter
X
Year 1
3rd
Quarter
4th
Quarter
X
X
X
$
X
$
$
X
X
$
$
X
$
$
Design and print rebate forms
Develop a customer database of customers receiving
rebates
Generate internal progress reports and implement
corrective measures as necessary
$
X
$
X
2nd
Quarter
Year 2
3rd
Quarter
4th
Quarter
X
X
X
$
$
$
X
$
X
$
X
X
X
X
$
$
$
$
$
$
X
X
X
$
X
X
X
X
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Process and Distribute rebate materials
1st
Quarter
X
Customer Satisfaction Surveys
Produce Quarterly Progress Reports for DWR
X
X
X
X
X
X
$
X
$
X
$
X
$
X
$
X
$
X
$
X
$
X
$
$
$
$
X
$
$
$
$
$
X
$
$5,000
$13,000
$13,000
$13,000
$13,000
$13,000
$13,000
$30,546
$113,546
Produce Final Program Report
Quarterly Costs
Total Program Cost
